TIOL-DDT 31 · the untouched capture
Rendered as it looked. Links and images are disabled in this view; the file itself is untouched.
<html>
<head>
<title>Untitled Document</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><font color="#0000FF">TIOL-DDT
31</font><br>
13 1 2005<br>
Thursday</b></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#009933" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
<b>Denovo – Who should adjudicate?</b></font></p>
<p align="left"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By
Circular No.752/78/2003-CX dated 1.10.2003, Board had revised the adjudication
powers of various officers and the new limits were fixed as follows.<br>
<span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<table border=1 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 style='border-collapse:collapse;
mso-table-layout-alt:fixed;border:none;mso-border-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'>
<tr>
<td width=191 valign=top style='width:190.85pt;border:solid windowtext .5pt;
padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'><b>Central
Excise Officers<o:p></o:p></b></span></font></p></td>
<td width=211 valign=top style='width:210.55pt;border:solid windowtext .5pt;
border-left:none;mso-border-left-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'><b>(Amount
of duty involved)<o:p></o:p></b></span></font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width=191 valign=top style='width:190.85pt;border:solid windowtext .5pt;
border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'>Deputy/Assistant
Commissioners<o:p></o:p></span></font></p></td>
<td width=211 valign=top style='width:210.55pt;border-top:none;border-left:
none;border-bottom:solid windowtext .5pt;border-right:solid windowtext .5pt;
mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;
padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'>Up
to Rs.5 lakhs<o:p></o:p></span></font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width=191 valign=top style='width:190.85pt;border:solid windowtext .5pt;
border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'>Joint
Commissioners<o:p></o:p></span></font></p></td>
<td width=211 valign=top style='width:210.55pt;border-top:none;border-left:
none;border-bottom:solid windowtext .5pt;border-right:solid windowtext .5pt;
mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;
padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'>Above
Rs.5 lakhs and up to Rs.20 lakhs</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Verdana'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width=191 valign=top style='width:190.85pt;border:solid windowtext .5pt;
border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'>Additional
Commissioners<o:p></o:p></span></font></p></td>
<td width=211 valign=top style='width:210.55pt;border-top:none;border-left:
none;border-bottom:solid windowtext .5pt;border-right:solid windowtext .5pt;
mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;
padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'>Above
Rs.20 lakhs and up to Rs.50 lakhs</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Verdana'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width=191 valign=top style='width:190.85pt;border:solid windowtext .5pt;
border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'>Commissioners<o:p></o:p></span></font></p></td>
<td width=211 valign=top style='width:210.55pt;border-top:none;border-left:
none;border-bottom:solid windowtext .5pt;border-right:solid windowtext .5pt;
mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;mso-border-left-alt:solid windowtext .5pt;
padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'>Without
limit <o:p></o:p></span></font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
What will happen if a case decided by a JC comes back for denovo adjudication
and now as per the new monetary limits, it can be adjudicated by Assistant Commissioner?
The Board had clarified in Circular No.762/78/2003-CX dated 11.11.2003 that
the adjudication has to be done by the officer competent to adjudicate as per
the revised norms unless the appellate authority had specified the officer who
would adjudicate the case.<br>
<br>
Now there is a rethinking in the Board and it is now clarified that the remand
cases will be adjudicated by the same authority that passed the original order.
Board hastens to clarify that cases already adjudicated will not be affected
by this clarification. A case adjudicated by the Commissioner comes back on
remand from Tribunal. Now it is within the powers of the Additional Commissioner.
So if the Additional Commissioner adjudicates the case, the appeal would lie
to Commissioner (Appeals). It took the Board more than a year to clarify this
position. <br>
<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=31&filename=notification/excise/2005/excircular806.htm">CBEC
Circular No.806/3/2005-CX dated 12.1.2005</a></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#009933" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Import
of metal scrap – CBEC adds two more ICDs</b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By
Circular No.56/2004-Cus, dated 18th October, 2004, CBEC had prescribed 15 customs
stations through which metal scrap import would be allowed. By Public Notice
No.38/2004-09, dated 27.12.2004, DGFT had announced a list of 17 stations through
which the import would be allowed. To catch up with DGFT, Board has now added
the two stations missing from the list and included in the DGFT list. So as
per DGFT, import was allowed through these two new stations from 27.12.2004,
but CBEC would allow it only from 12.1.2005. Shouldn’t there be a co-ordination
mechanism between Customs and DGFT? Notifications should be issued simultaneously
or only one authority should be allowed to issue the notifications and clarifications
and they should be deemed to be issued by both.<br>
<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=25&filename=notification/custom/2005/cuscir05_002.htm">CIRCULAR
NO 02/2005-Cus, Dated : January 12, 2004</a></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#009933" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Old
is Gold, says CBEC </b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Notification
No 62/2004 fixes the rate of duty for imported gold and silver. Sl. No 1 of
the table reads as follows:-<span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana'><b><o:p></o:p></b></span></font></p>
<table border=1 cellpadding=0 width="92%" style='width:92.72%;mso-cellspacing:
1.5pt;border:outset silver .75pt;mso-padding-alt:3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt'>
<tr>
<td valign=top style='border:inset silver .75pt;padding:3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;
mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>1.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p></td>
<td valign=top style='border:inset silver .75pt;padding:3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;
mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>Gold bars, other than tola bars, bearing Manufacturer’s
or refiner’s engraved serial number and weight expressed in metric
units, and <span style='color:red'><b>old</b></span> coins<o:p></o:p></span></font></p></td>
<td width="22%" valign=top style='width:22.36%;border:inset silver .75pt;
padding:3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt 3.0pt'> <p class=MsoNormal><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;
mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>Rs. 100 per 10 gms.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><br>
Now the Government wants <font color="#FF0000">old</font> coins to be read as
<font color="#FF0000">gold</font> coins</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=23&filename=notification/custom/2005/corrig62.htm">CBEC’s
corrigendum dated 7.1.2005</a></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#009933" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>NTT
Bill goes to standing Committee</b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Revenue
officials who hoped for a cosy parking place after retirement in the National
Tax Tribunal were terribly disappointed with the Bill presented in the Lok Sabha
as they found that their expected slot was missing in the Bill. The Bill did
not provided for any technical member post in the Tribunal and that meant senior
about–to- retire-revenue officers had no place in the Tribunal. Now everything
is not lost. The Bill has been referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee
for examination and report. <br>
<br>
The Committee has decided to invite written memoranda containing suggestions/views/comments
of individuals / institutions/organisations, etc. interested in the subject
matter of the Bill. Memoranda to the Committee may be sent in duplicate (either
in English or Hindi) to Shri Surinder Kumar Watts, Deputy Secretary, Rajya Sabha
Secretariat, 007, Ground Floor, Parliament House Annexe, New Delhi – 110001
(Tel: 23034262 and Fax: 23013917) within fifteen days, indicating whether they
would also be interested in giving oral evidence before the Committee.<br>
<br>
<font color="#9900CC"><b>Wouldn't it be nice if you could own a large share
of every business in the country, with no work or investment - just like the
IRS? </b></font><br>
<br>
<font color="#FF0000"><b>Until tomorrow with more of DDT<br>
<br>
Have a Nice Day </b></font></font></p>
<p align="justify"></p>
</body>
</html>